This article was downloaded by: [University of Stellenbosch]

On: 07 October 2014, At: 01:45

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part B:

Pesticides, Food Contaminants, and Agricultural Wastes
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lesb20

Napropamide Residues in Runoff and Infiltration Water

from Pepper Production
a a
George F. Antonious & Matthew A. Patterson
a
Department of Plant and Soil Science , Kentucky State University, Land Grant Program ,
Frankfort , Kentucky , USA
Published online: 06 Feb 2007.

To cite this article: George F. Antonious & Matthew A. Patterson (2005) Napropamide Residues in Runoff and Infiltration
Water from Pepper Production, Journal of Environmental Science and Health, Part B: Pesticides, Food Contaminants, and
Agricultural Wastes, 40:3, 385-396, DOI: 10.1081/PFC-200047570

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/PFC-200047570

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part B, 40:385–396, 2005
Copyright
C Taylor & Francis Inc.
ISSN: 0360-1234 (Print); 1532-4109 (Online)
DOI: 10.1081/PFC-200047570

Napropamide Residues in
Runoff and Infiltration Water
from Pepper Production
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

George F. Antonious and Matthew A. Patterson

Kentucky State University, Land Grant Program, Department of Plant and Soil Science,
Frankfort, Kentucky, USA
A field study was conducted on a Lowell silty loam soil of 2.7% organic matter at the
Kentucky State University Research Farm, Franklin County, Kentucky. Eighteen uni-
versal soil loss equation (USLE) standard plots (22 × 3.7 m each) were established on
a 10% slope. Three soil management practices were used: (i) class-A biosolids (sewage
sludge), (ii) yard waste compost, each mixed with native soil at a rate of 50 ton acre−1 on a
dry-weight basis, and (iii) a no-mulch (NM) treatment (rototilled bare soil), used for com-
parison purposes. Devrinol 50-DF “napropamide” [N,N-diethyl-2-(1-naphthyloxy) pro-
pionamide]was applied as a preemergent herbicide, incorporated into the soil surface,
and the plots were planted with 60-day-old sweet bell pepper seedlings. Napropamide
residues one hour following spraying averaged 0.8, 0.4, and 0.3 µg g−1 dry soil in sewage
sludge, yard waste compost, and no-mulch treatments, respectively. Surface runoff wa-
ter, runoff sediment, and napropamide residues in runoff were significantly reduced by
the compost and biosolid treatments. Yard waste compost treatments increased water
infiltration and napropamide residues in the vadose zone compared to sewage sludge and
NM treatments. Total pepper yields from yard waste compost amended soils (9187 lbs
acre−1 ) was significantly higher (P < 0.05) than yield from either the soil amended with
class-A biosolids (6984 lbs acre−1 ) or the no-mulch soil (7162 lbs acre −1 ).

Key Words: Soil; Sewage sludge; Biosolids; Yard waste; Pepper fruit quality; Mobility.

INTRODUCTION
Contamination of surface and groundwater by pesticides is of great concern. Ap-
plication of pesticides to agricultural fields may result in their transport into
surface waters via runoff or into groundwater through infiltration.[1,2] New soil
management practices are needed to develop and expand our knowledge and

Address correspondence to George F. Antonious, Kentucky State University, Land Grant

Program, Dept. of Plant and Soil Science, 218 Atwood Research Facility, Frankfort, KY
40601-2355, USA; E-mail: gantonious@gwmail.kysu.edu

385
 386 Antonious and Patterson

technical means of agricultural production related to the fate and transport of

agricultural chemicals into runoff and infiltration water. Napropamide [N,N-
diethyl-2-(1-naphthyloxy) propionamide] is an herbicide used to control annual
and perennial grasses and certain annual broad-leaved weeds.[3,4] Pesticide use,
while being of great benefit in controlling weeds, insects, and pathogens in agri-
cultural systems, also can pose a threat to environmental quality. Proper soil
management is a key element in reducing pesticide movement from agricul-
tural fields. Composting provides an organic amendment useful for improving
soil structure and nutrient status and stimulating soil microbial activity[5] that
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

may break down pesticides. Compost also has been shown to increase pesticide
sorption[6−8] and decrease pesticide leaching.[9,10]
The application of yard waste compost and sewage sludge (biosolids) to agri-
cultural soils helps minimize landfill disposal. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) estimates that 31 million tons of yard wastes[11] and 15 million
metric tons of biosolids[12] are discarded annually in the United States. In ad-
dition to the large amount of space that is wasted, bacterial decomposition
of yard wastes produces methane gas and acidic leachates that increase the
mobility of other waste components. In the early 1990s, 11 states and the
District of Columbia instituted legislation banning the disposal of yard wastes
in landfills, and by 1999 this number had increased to 23 states.[13] This legisla-
tion, in combination with a growing number of composting facilities across the
United States, has led to a gradual decline in yard waste disposal since 1992.
Biosolid (sewage sludge) disposal also has decreased with increased recycling
efforts. Currently, 60% of all biosolids produced are recycled as soil amend-
ments for reclamation sites, forest lands, and agricultural lands. However, less
than 1% of all agricultural lands in the United States are amended with re-
cycled biosolids.[14] Recycling this material as soil amendments would reduce
the need for landfill disposal and/or incineration and reduce the impact of their
disposal methods on environmental quality.
The addition of yard waste compost to soils has been shown to increase
yields for a wide variety of crops including pepper,[15] kohlrabi,[16] sunflower,[17]
and tall fescue.[18] Increased crop yields are attributed to increased organic mat-
ter content and improvements in the physical properties of the soil after the
addition of composted materials. Improved physical properties of soil include
increased aggregate stability,[19] increased moisture holding capacity,[20] and re-
duced bulk density[21] to allow for more efficient use of the mineral fertilizer.
Biosolid amendments also have been shown to increase yields of tall fescue,[22]
and alfalfa.[23] On the other hand, decreases in yield, due to the impact of salt
and heavy metal toxicity of sewage sludge, have been shown in other crops in-
cluding corn[24] and bush beans.[25] The proportion of sewage sludge recycled
for agricultural use is growing steadily in the United States.[26] Nutrients in
sludge are used to replace commercial fertilizers, while sludge organic matter
has been reported to improve soil structure, reduce soil erosion, and improve
 Napropamide Residues from Pepper Production 387

crop yield.[27] The objectives of this research were (1) to study the influence
of mixing native soil with yard waste compost and sewage sludge on the con-
centration of the herbicide napropamide in soil and its subsequent movement
into runoff and infiltration water, and (2) to study the impact of sewage sludge
(class-A biosolids) and yard waste compost on pepper yield and fruit quality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

A field study was conducted on a Lowell silty loam soil (2.8% organic matter,
pH 6.9) at Kentucky State University Research Farm, Franklin County,
Kentucky. The soil has an average of 12% clay, 75% silt, and 13% sand. Eigh-
teen (18) plots (universal soil loss equation [USLE] standard plots) of 22 ×
3.7 m each were established on a 10% slope. Plots were separated using metal
borders 20 cm above the ground level to prevent cross contamination between
treated and untreated plots. Three soil management practices, replicated six
times, were used: (1) yard waste compost made from yard and lawn trim-
mings, and vegetable remains (produced at Kentucky State University Re-
search Farm, Franklin County, KY) was mixed with native soil at 50 t acre−1
(on dry-weight basis) with a plowing depth of 15 cm, (2) sewage sludge (ob-
tained from Nicholasville Wastewater Treatment Plant, Nicholasville, KY) was
also mixed with native soil at 50 t acre−1 (on dry-weight basis), and (3) no-
mulch (NM) treatment (rototilled bare soil) was used for comparison purposes.
Devrinol 50-DF “napropamide” (Fig. 1) obtained from United Phosphorus, Inc.
(P.O. Box 570, Exton, PA; EPA Registration No. 10182-258-70506) was sprayed
as a preemergent herbicide at the rate of 4 lb of formulated product acre−1
using a 4-gallon portable backpack sprayer (Solo) equipped with one conical
nozzle operated at 40 p.s.i. and incorporated into the soil surface. Sweet pepper
(Capsicum annuum L. cv. Aristotle-X3R) seeds were obtained from Seedway

Figure 1: Chemical structure of napropamide [Devrinol, (N,N-diethyl-2-(1-naphthyloxy)

propionamide)].
 388 Antonious and Patterson

(1225 Zeager Road, Elizabethtown, PA). Sixty-day-old seedlings were planted

on June 10, 2002, at 10 rows plot−1 along the contour of the land slope at 10
plants row−1 . Plots were irrigated by overhead sprinklers and no mineral fer-
tilizer was applied.
Soil samples (6 replicates per treatment) were collected at different time
intervals (n = 10) during the 30 days following spraying to a depth of 15 cm
using a soil core sampler equipped with a plastic liner tube (Clements Asso-
ciates, Newton, IA, USA) of 2.5 cm i.d. for maintenance of sample integrity. Soil
samples were air-dried in the dark, sieved to a size of ≤2 mm. Thirty-g soil sam-
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

ples were used to determine soil moisture content to report the results on dry-
weight basis. For pesticide residue analysis, 30-g soil were shaken with 100 mL
of acetone for 1 h using a Multi-wrist shaker (Lab-Line Instruments, Inc.,
Melrose Park, IL, USA). The solvent was filtered through Whatman 934-AH
glass microfibre discs (Fisher Sci, Pittsburgh, PA) of 90 mm diameter, concen-
trated by rotary vacuum (Buchi Rotavapor Model 461, Switzerland) and N2 gas
stream evaporation for GC/NPD determination.
Runoff (soil-water suspension) was collected and quantified at the lower end
of each plot using a tipping-bucket runoff metering apparatus (Department of
Agricultural Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA). Ho-
mogeneous samples of runoff were collected in amber borosilicate glass bottles
and transported to the laboratory on ice in coolers. Sediment in runoff was de-
termined by weighing the sediments collected from a 1-L sample of runoff using
Whatman No.1 filter paper. Napropamide residues were extracted from sedi-
ment samples as described in soil analysis. Total runoff water lost per runoff
event, per each 0.02-acre plot, was used to measure napropamide concentration.
To monitor the presence of napropamide residues in the vadose zone (the
unsaturated water layer below the plant root), pan-lysimeters (Department of
Agricultural Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA) were
installed at the end of the experimental plots down the land slope at a depth
of 1.5 m. Infiltration water was collected in amber borosilicate glass bottles.
Duplicate of 500 mL aliquots were filtered through Whatman 934-AH glass mi-
crofibre discs using vacuum filtration. Napropamide residues were extracted
three times by liquid-liquid partition with 100, 60, and 40 mL of acetone-
methylene chloride mixture (1:1). CH2 Cl2 fractions (bottom layer) were com-
bined and passed over Na2 SO4 anhydrous, then evaporated to dryness using N2
stream and reconstituted in acetone for GC/NPD determination. Napropamide
residues were determined using a Hewlett-Packard model 5890A series II gas
chromatograph (Hewlett-Packard Co., Avondale, PA) equipped with an NP de-
tector. Samples were injected onto a BD-5 high resolution column (15 m × 0.53
mm i.d.) with 0.5 µm film thickness (J & W Scientific, Folson, CA). Operating
conditions were 230, 250, and 280◦ C for injector, oven, and detector, respectively.
Carrier gas (He) flow rate was 5.2 mL min−1 . Peak areas were determined on
a Hewlett-Packard model 3396 series II integrator. Quantification was based
 Napropamide Residues from Pepper Production 389
on average peak areas of 1 µL injections obtained from external standard so-
lutions of napropamide ranging from 1 to 10 ng µL−1 . Under these conditions
retention time (Rt) of napropamide was 10.99 min. Peak identity was confirmed
by consistent retention time and coelution with standards under the conditions
described. Napropamide residues also were confirmed using GC/MSD which
showed spectral data with a molecular ion peak (M+ ) at m/z 271, along with
other characteristic fragment ion peaks (Fig. 2). Napropamide technical mate-
rial of 97.9% purity was obtained from Chem Service (660 Tower Lane, West
Chester, PA). Linearity over the range of concentrations was determined using
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

regression analysis (R2 = 0.99). Standard solutions were used to spike blank
soil samples for evaluating the reproducibility and efficiency of the analyti-
cal procedures to recover napropamide residues. Recoveries (means ± SE) of

Figure 2: Electron impact mass spectrum of napropamide indicating the molecular ion of
m/z 271.
 390 Antonious and Patterson

napropamide from fortified soil samples were 92.3 ± 4.3, 91.4 ± 5.0, and 82.5 ±
3.5% from soil mixed with yard compost, soil mixed with sewage sludge, and no-
mulch soil, respectively. Recoveries from water samples averaged 89.7 ± 3.2%.
Quality control (QC) samples included three field blanks to detect possible con-
tamination during sampling, processing, and analysis. The lack of napropamide
residues in the blank samples suggested there was no contamination from sam-
pling, processing, or laboratory procedures.
Peppers were harvested 72 days, 86 days, and 100 days after planting,
weighed, and the fruits were graded according to USDA standards for sweet
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

peppers.[28] USDA standards require mature green sweet peppers that are firm,
well shaped, and free from defects. All peppers not meeting these requirements
were culled. The total number and weight of culled peppers from each treat-
ment were recorded. The remaining peppers were graded as US Fancy (at least
3 inches in diameter and 3.5 inches in length), US No. 1 (at least 2.5 inches in
diameter and 2.5 inches in length), and US No. 2 (<2.5 inches in diameter). Sta-
tistical comparisons were done between the three soil management practices
using the ANOVA procedure (SAS Institute, 2001).[29]

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Napropamide residues following application and incorporation into the top 10–
15 cm of soil were significantly higher in sewage sludge treatments only 1 h
following spraying compared to yard waste and no-mulch treatments (Fig. 3).

Figure 3: Napropamide residues in soil collected from the rhizosphere of pepper plants
during 30 days following spraying with Devrinol 50-DF. Statistical comparisons were done
between three soil management practices. Means accompanied by asterisks indicate a
significant difference (P < 0.05) between soil treatments at a given time using Duncan’s
LSD test (SAS Institute, 2001).[29]
 Napropamide Residues from Pepper Production 391
Previous results have indicated that the sorption of pesticides was highest
in soils with the greatest content of organic matter.[8,30,31] Our results (data
not shown) have indicated that the organic matter contents were significantly
higher in soil mixed with sewage sludge (5.95%) and soil mixed with yard waste
compost (5.72%) compared to NM bare soil (2.7%). Addition of sludge also has
increased the soil pH roughly 1.5 units compared to native soil.[32] An increase
in soil pH can bring about strong adsorption on soil particles or, in some cases,
precipitation of Mn, Cu, and Zn among other metals, which in turn allows for
lower accumulation of these metals in plant tissues.[33] Application of compost
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

as a soil management practice may therefore lead to increased retention or

removal of hydrophobic compounds like trifluralin (an herbicide) from runoff
water[34] or retention of pyrethrins (natural insecticides) on soil particles.[8]
Also, application of carbon-rich waste to soils may be useful for reducing pesti-
cide leaching to groundwater.[7] Napropamide having water solubility of 74 mg
L−1[35] is expected to be more mobile in the soil and subject to moving away from
the site of application following natural rainfall or irrigation. This may explain
why napropamide residues were higher in runoff from no-mulch soil compared
to soil mixed with compost (Fig. 4). A substantial amount of runoff is being

Figure 4: Volume of runoff water and napropamide residues in runoff water (upper graph)
and runoff sediment and napropamide residues in sediment (lower graph) from pepper
grown on erodible land under three soil management practices. Statistical comparisons
were done between three soil management practices. Bars accompanied by different
letter are significantly different (P < 0.05) from each other using Duncan’s LSD test (SAS
Institute, 2001).[29]
 392 Antonious and Patterson
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

Figure 5: Infiltration water and napropamide residues detected in infiltration water

collected from the vadose zone of pepper plants grown under three soil management
practices. Statistical comparisons were done between three soil management practices.
Bars accompanied by different letter are significantly different (P < 0.05) from each other
using Duncan’s LSD test (SAS Institute, 2001).[29]

retarded by the two compost treatments (sewage sludge and yard waste com-
post) along the land slope that would otherwise have been transported downhill
into streams and rivers. However, yard waste compost also increased water in-
filtration and napropamide residues in the vadose zone (Fig. 5), as indicated by
the volume of water collected in the pan-lysimeters installed at the lower end
of each plot.
Yard waste compost is rich in nutrients and organic matter.[32] Treatments
high in organic matter produced high pepper yield (Fig. 6). Organic substances

Figure 6: Yield of pepper grown under three soil management practices. Statistical
comparisons were done between the three soil management practices for each pepper
class or total yield. Bars accompanied by different letter in each class or total marketable
yield are significantly different (P < 0.05) from each other using Duncan’s LSD test (SAS
Institute, 2001).[29]
 Napropamide Residues from Pepper Production 393
and nutrients in compost support a vast population of soil organisms that
“mine” for soil minerals. Evidence of enhanced microbial activity in the rhi-
zosphere of plants grown with yard waste compost has been reported.[36,37] The
effects of compost application on crop yield are derived from availability of
nutrients in compost (particularly N). Availability of soluble P also increased
following addition of compost.[38] Total pepper yield from yard waste compost
amended soils was significantly higher than yields from either the unamended
or sludge amended soils. Total yield from sludge and no-mulch treatments were
not significantly different. The use of sewage sludge in land farming must in-
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

crease profits in order for it to become an accepted practice among vegetable

growers. The higher pepper marketable yield from yard waste compost amended
soils arose primarily as a result of significantly higher yields of grade US Fancy
(Fig. 6). The addition of yard waste compost also increased the number of large
supermarket ready peppers (US Fancy). The number of bell peppers culled as
a result of external defects was not significantly different between sludge and
yard waste treatments but was higher in yard waste compost treatments than
NM treatments (Fig. 7).
The methods of application of sewage sludge and yard waste are simple,
inexpensive, energy conserving, and effective for nutrient recycling. Our re-
sults have indicated that the addition of recycled yard waste to native soil
significantly increased total yield and yield of larger, supermarket ready bell
peppers. But, the complexation of pesticides with a water-soluble carrier such
as dissolved organic matter (DOM) in the two types of compost may facilitate

Figure 7: Number of pepper fruits obtained under three soil management practices.
Statistical comparisons were done between three soil management practices for each
pepper class or total marketable number. Bars accompanied by different letter in each
class or total yield are significantly different (P < 0.05) from each other using Duncan’s LSD
test (SAS Institute, 2001).[29]
 394 Antonious and Patterson

chemical movement through soil. A strong positive relationship was found be-
tween napropamide concentration and DOM content in soil leachates.[39,40]
DOM, therefore, can affect the distribution of solutes between soil solution
and sorbed phases and the availability and environmental fate of the so-
lutes. The increased napropamide movement through the soil mixed with
yard waste compost into the vadose zone (Fig. 5) could be attributed to
the formation of napropamide-DOM complexes that lack adsorption affin-
ity for the solid phase.[40,41] A larger fraction of napropamide mass moved
horizontally on the soil surface in the NM bare soil through runoff water
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

as compared to yard waste or sewage sludge mixed soils (Fig. 4), and this
counteracts the concentration of napropamide detected in infiltration water
(Fig. 5). Napropamide seeping into the vadose zone was lowest in no-mulch
soil compared to compost treatments. This trend confirms that sorption of
napropamide increased with the soil clay content and not with organic matter
content.[3]
The mobility of any pesticide in soil is one of the principal parameters
controlling the extent to which a pesticide may represent a risk for surface and
groundwater contamination. The application of compost to agricultural soils is
practiced to minimize landfill disposal and the organic matter in compost helps
to improve soil fertility, but DOM derived from compost may complex with
pesticides such as napropamide and enhance their vertical transport through
the soil into groundwater. The perfect set of pesticide properties for preventing
pesticides from reaching groundwater would include a combination of low water
solubility and tight binding to soil particles.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Samuel Mutisya, Robert Stone, Eddie Read,
and John Clay for their kind help in pepper harvest. This investigation was
supported by a grant from USDA/CSREES to Kentucky State University under
agreement No. KYX-10-03-37P.

REFERENCES
1. USGS. The loads of selected herbicides in the Ohio River basin. U.S. Geological
Survey Fact Sheet No. 089-02, November 2002.
2. Antonious, G.F. Soil infiltration by pesticides. In Encyclopedia of Pest Management;
Pimentel, D., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2003; Vol. 3, 1–4.
3. Aguer, J.P.; Cox, L.; Richard, C.; Hermosin, M.C.; Cornejo, J. Sorption and photolysis
studies in soil and sediment of the herbicide napropamide. J. Environ. Sci. Health 2000,
B35 (6), 725–738.
4. Anonymous. Commercial Vegetable Crop Recommendations, Cooperative Extension
Service, University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture, 2003; ID-36.
 Napropamide Residues from Pepper Production 395
5. Barriuso, E.; Houot, S.; Serra-Wittling, C. Influence of compost addition to soil on
the behaviour of herbicides. Pestic. Sci. 1997, 49, 65–75.
6. Martinez, M.J.; Almendros, G. Pesticide sorption on soils treated with evergreen
oak biomass at different humification stages. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 1992, 23,
717–1729.
7. Guo, L.; Bicki, T.J.; Felsot, A.S.; Hinesly, T.D. Sorption and movement of alachlor in
soil modified by carbon-rich wastes. J. Environ. Qual. 1993, 22, 186–194.
8. Antonious, G.F.; Patel, G.A.; Snyder, J.C.; Coyne, M.S. Pyrethrins and piperonyl
butoxide adsorption to soil organic matter. J. Environ. Sci. Health 2004, B39 (1), 19–32.
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

9. Zsolnay, A. Effect of an organic fertilizer on the transport of the herbicide atrazine

in soil. Chemosphere 1992, 24, 663–669.
10. Zbytniewski, R.; Buszewski, B. Sorption of pesticides in soil and compost. Polish J.
Environ. Studies 2002, 11 (2), 179–184.
11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental fact sheet: Yard waste com-
posting, EPA/530-SW-91-009, 1991.
12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Standards for the disposal of sewage sludge;
proposed rule—1989. Federal Register 5, 5746–5902.
13. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Municipal solid waste in the United States:
Facts and figures—1999. 2001 EPA/530-R-01-014, 2001.
14. National Research Council. Biosolids Applied to Land: Advancing Standards and
Practices; National Academic Press:—, 2002; 346 pp.
15. Gaskell, M. The effects of manure, compost, and feather meal on soil nitrogen dy-
namics, beneficial soil microorganisms, and bell pepper yield. Research report submitted
to the Organic Farming Research Foundation, 2001; 14 pp.
16. Vogtmann, H.; Fricke, K. Nutrient value and utilization of biogenic compost in
plant production. Agr. Eco. Environ. 1989, 27, 471–475.
17. Marchesini, A.; Allievi, L.; Comotti, E.; Ferrari, A. Long-term effects of quality-
compost treatment on soil. Plant Soil 1988, 106, 253–261.
18. Sullivan, D.M.; Mary, A.I.; Thomas, D.R.; Fransen, S.C.; Cogger, C.G. Food waste
compost effects on fertilizer nitrogen efficiency, available nitrogen, and tall fescue yield.
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2002, 66, 154–161.
19. Hernando, S.; Lobo, M.C.; Polo, A. Effect of application of a municipal refuse com-
post on the physical and chemical properties of a soil. Sci. Total Environ. 1989, 81/82,
589–596.
20. Einspahr, D.; Fiscus, M.H. Paper mill sludge as a soil amendment. In 1984 TAPPI
Proceedings: Environmental Conference, pp. 253–257.
21. Tester, C.F. Organic amendment effects on physical and chemical properties of a
sandy soil. J. Soil Sci. Soci. Am. 1990, 54, 827–831.
22. Cogger, C.G.; Bary, A.I.; Fransen, S.C.; Sullivan, D.M. Seven years of biosolids
versus inorganic nitrogen applications to tall fescue. J. Environ. Qual. 2001, 30, 2188–
2194.
23. Rebah, F.B.; Prevost, D.; Tyagi, R.D. Growth of alfalfa in sludge-amended soils and
inoculated with rhizobia produced in sludge. J. Environ. Qual. 2002, 31, 1339–1348.
24. Mench, M.J.; Didier, V.L.; Loffler, M; Gomez, A; Masson, P. A mimicked in situ
remediation study of metal-contaminated soils with emphasis on cadmium and lead. J.
Environ. Qual. 1994, 23 (1), 58–64.
 396 Antonious and Patterson

25. Giordano, P.M.; Mortvedt, J.J.; Mays, D.A. Effects of municipal wastes on crop yields
and uptake of heavy metals. J. Environ. Qual. 1975, 4, 394–399.
26. Beck, A.J.; Lam, V.; Henderson, D.E.; Beven, K.J.; Harris, G.L.; Howse, K.R.;
Johnson, A.E.; Jones, K.C. Movement in water and the herbicides atrazine and isopro-
turon through a large structural clay soil core. J. Contam. Hydrol. 1995, 19, 237–260.
27. Bevacqua, R.F.; Mellano, V.J. Sewage sludge compost’s cumulative effects on crop
growth and soil properties. Compost Sci. Util. 1993, 1, 34–37.
28. U.S. Department of Agriculture. United States Standards for Grades of Sweet Pep-
pers. USDA Agriculture Marketing Service: Washington, DC, 1981.
Downloaded by [University of Stellenbosch] at 01:45 07 October 2014

29. SAS Institute, SAS/STAT Guide, Release 6.03 Edition; SAS Inc., SAS Campus
Drive, Cary, NC, USA, 2001.
30. Sparks, D.L. Chemistry of soil organic matter. In Environmental Soil Chemistry;
Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 1995; chap. 3, pp. 53–79.
31. Zbytniewski, R.; Buszewski, B. Sorption of pesticides in soil and compost. Polish J.
Environ. Studies 2002, 11, 179–184.
32. Antonious, G.F.; Patterson, M.A.; Snyder, J.C. Pesticide residues in soil and quality
of potato grown with sewage sludge. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2003, 71, 315–322.
33. Straton, M.L.; Rechcigl, J.E. Organic mulches, wood products, and compost as soil
amendments and conditioners. In Handbook of Soil Conditioners, Wallace, A.; Terry, R.
Eds.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1998; pp. 43–95.
34. Antonious, G.F. Trifluralin residues in runoff and infiltration water from tomato
production. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 2004, 72 (5), 962–969.
35. Anonymous. The Pesticide Manual, Agrochemicals Handbook, 10th Ed; Tomblin
C., Ed.; British Crop Protection Council: Farnham, UK, 1997.
36. Anderson, T.A.; Kruger, E.L.; Coasts, J.R. Biochemical degradation of pesticides
wastes in the root zone of soils collected at an agrochemical dealership. In Bioremediation
Through Rhizosphere Technology; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1994;
pp. 199–209.
37. Antonious, G.F. Impact of soil management and two botanical insecticides on urease
and invertase activity. J. Environ. Sci. Health 2003, 38,479–488.
38. Swiader, J.M.; Morse, R.D. Influence of organic amendments on phosphorus re-
quirement. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci. 1984, 109, 150–155.
39. Nelson, S.D.; Letey, J.; Farmer, W.J.; Williams, C.F.; Ben-Hur, M. Facilitated trans-
port of napropamide by dissolved organic matter in sewage sludge-amended soil. J.
Environ. Qual. 1998, 27, 1194–1200.
40. Lee, D.Y.; Farmer, W.J.; Aochi Y. Sorption of napropamide on clay and soil in the
presence of dissolved organic matter. J. Environ. Qual. 1990, 19, 567–573.
41. Nelson, S.D.; Letey, J.; Farmer, W.J.; Williams, C.F.; Ben-Hur, M. Herbicide appli-
cation method effects on napropamide complexation with dissolved organic matter. J.
Environ. Qual. 2000, 29, 987–994.